Resolved: That, on balance, social networking Web sites have a positive impact on the United States.
Today, I am against the resolution, Resolved: That, on balance, social networking Web sites have a positive impact on the United States. Social networking sites have had a negative impact on the United States. My first conjunctions is as followed; --Social Networking is potentially going to harm to persons using them. One example of this is Megan Meier, who took her life after an old friends mom posed as a boy on myspace and began harassing her. When a social networking site does nothing to protect users of its site, we see it as unfit. Just as we would see a mother unfit to raise a child if she didn't protect it from danger.
Pro I'd like to welcome my opponent to the site; to get better acquainted, I figured that I would take this debate challenge, and observe her debating style for myself; not to mention, I wanted to expand my horizons a bit, and talk about something a bit more lighthearted.
To clarify one thing: If it wasn't already known, then social networking sites are things like Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter, as opposed to dating sites like Match.com, Chemistry.com, etc.
To things manageable, I will make only a couple of opening arguments, and I will briefly refute the Con's.
I - Social networking is beneficial.
Man is, by nature, a social creature; that is, people need people. As technology advances, so does mankind's means of communicating and socializing; for example, we've developed things such as the telegraph/telegram, mail service, telephone/cell phone, video chat, and now, we are looking at social networking sites; thus, we can see that, because social networking has increased the ability of people to communicate and socialize, whether city, state, nation, or even worldwide, social networking sites have clearly had a positive impact on society.
II - Social networking sites balance a child's privacy and a parent's right to know.
A classic clash always happens when pitting the right to privacy of a child against the right to know of a parent; however, social networking sites find a happy medium, so that neither side is overlooked; for example, on Facebook, a teenager may have private conversations with a friend over the private messaging system, but the parent of this teenager will still be able to keep track of things such as posts made to other friends' walls, pictures posted, etc. Social networking sites give parents the ability to keep tabs on many of their child's online postings, such as pictures and personal information, but without having to directly invade on their child's privacy; this again proves that social networking sites have had a positive effect on society.
III - Social networking sites provide a degree of online safety.
While all websites and internet users are vulnerable to some degree, the openness and oversight provided by the staff of social networking sites, give or take a few situations, ensures a higher degree of safety than might be found elsewhere on the internet. While these sites don't have to take direct responsibility for their users, there's still a higher sense of security than would be found in unchecked e-mail services, instant messengers, and chat rooms full of shady characters; so, to some extent, social networking sites provide all the benefits of other services, such as IM and e-mail, but without the fear of being stalked by a predator or serial killer [though I can't account for the harmless creepers that tend to accumulate on some sites. :)].
Now, to move on to the Con's sole contention.
1. Social networking is potentially harmful.
a. A lot of different things can be potentially harmful; however, simply because something has the potential to be misused does not mean that it has had a negative effect on society; prescription medication, for example, can (and often is) abused by the people to whom it is prescribed; however, this potential for abuse does not mean that we do away with prescription drugs completely, and it is the same with social networking sites.
b. In the case with Megan Meier, this girl was already reported to suffer from depression, was on several medications, and since the third grade, had been kept under the careful eye of her psychiatrist [http://en.wikipedia.org...]; as we can see, Megan was already in a fragile condition; as we can see, it was not MySpace that was responsible for Megan's tragic suicide; rather, this unfortunate event can be attributed to Lori Drew, Ashley Grills, and the several other people who aided in operating the account and harassing Megan; clearly, MySpace didn't intend for their site to be used in such a way, and this is evidenced by the fact that Ms. Drew, among others, was brought to trial, not the MySpace staff; for example, if someone is shot in a nightclub, nobody holds the nightclub staff responsible for being unaware that the shooting would happen; they hold the shooter responsible, as he is the one that committed the detestable act; in the same way, MySpace cannot be held accountable for the malicious acts of other people, and this instance, while tragic, is not a negative effect of social networking sites, but merely the misuse of them.
I will stand down for the moment, and allow my opponent to chew on my opening arguments for a bit. Good luck, Con!
Debate Round No. 1
Con Good Morning, and thank you for welcoming me. To begin the second round of our debate, I will first demolish my opponents case, then move on to my own.
I- My opponents first conjunction what that Social Networking Web Sites are beneficial to Americans. I do agree with my opponent that people need people. But long before we had social networking sites we had other ways of communicating. We picked up a phone, or wrote an actual letter. Have Americans become so lazy that they can't do this?
II- The second conjunction of my opponent's case was that social networking is a balance between child's privacy and the parents right to know. Every parent wants to think that their child is smart enough to know what to post and do online. Unless you plan to sit with your child every time they use the computer, and watch their every move you can't insure they are doing exactly what they say. Another fact is that, if you don't allow your child access to the internet at home, they may be getting online and using social networking sites at friends' houses. --As my opponent brought up, a child can receive private messages online from anyone. On facebook and/or myspace, you don't have to have a person as a friend to send them messages.
III- My opponents last point is that social networking provide a degree of online safety. As many people seem to forget, social networking sites allow you to search any name, place, or group. It is a lot easier for you to search a random name, or look for a person in your area on a social networking site because they give you results. As for IM, you have to know a persons complete address to add them. You can't just type in a name and get their email. So social networking sites allow easier access to persons information. While we are talking about gaining persons information, social networking sites have many categories that you fill out, along with name (first and last), age, and where you live/hometown. This allows shady characters to find you, and follow you. And they could potentially steal information about you.
Now to move on to my case.
I- Social Networking Sites effect children's education.
With more and more social networking sites being created, children are using them more. When children get home one of the first things they do is log into their "space" or profile and begin chatting. This is effecting their school work, because they aren't spending enough time or giving their all. Along with not spending enough time on work, students are spending time at night online and not sleeping. Without the sleep required by their body, they have a harder time paying attention in class or do not complete work.
II- Social networking sites allow sexual predators easy access to persons' information.
With over 250,000,000 users on Facebook a vast majority of them are sexual predators. In the year 2007 Facebook deleted 90,000 sexual predator accounts. Those being the ones reported to traced. And since May they have deleted 5,585 accounts. These sexual predators use social networking sites because they are easy access and you can lie easily on them. You don't have to put your actual name, age, or picture. This makes it very convenient to gain trust from somebody and use it against them.
III- Social networking sites can harm your computer and cost money. Both Myspace and Facebook (along with others) have disclaimers telling you to beware or odd friend requests and about opening messages from people you don't know. They can harm viruses, and other computer glitches. Unmarked emails can hold trackers that allow the sender to hack your account, take information, or use the information against you. Trackers may also allow that person to follow what you do online, like visit the website of your bank. Which gives them more access to your accounts and passwords.
IX- Social networking takes massive amounts of time. Like any hobby, social networking sites need to be maintained. Constantly updating your account, checking to see which friends are online, and seeing what everybody is doing takes a great amount of time. This can cut into time used to do something more productive or beneficial, such as exercising or reading a new book. We need to face the fact that Americans (some) are along the most obese persons. Although this is important (maintaining health), it is not one of my mom important points.
X- Social Networking sites allow simple information to be used against you. As talked about on HLN this morning, information you post can be used against you. Simply saying that you are going on vacation can allow others to take advantage of the situation and break into your house. Not only are you losing your possessions, but you will lose money replacing them.
I would like to apologize to my opponent for taking so long to reply, I've been working on my boxes for extemp. Good Luck Aff. Pro To keep things oriented, I will proceed in much the same fashion as my opponent, starting with my contentions, then moving to hers, and then covering the new arguments (which, to my knowledge, weren't in the constructive, and probably shouldn't be included, but will be covered by me regardless).
I - Lazy Americans
a. Though people don't write letters nearly as much anymore, this is more for convenience than anything; though letters might take days to arrive, a message sent through a social networking site such as Facebook allows nearly instantaneous transmission; and, despite what my opponent would have you believe, social networking has not erased the postal service or the phone companies; many people still retain home phones, cell phones, and, as far as I am aware, I still get bills, reports, and other things through the mail each day; there are some things that you simply can't ship through a social networking site, so we can clearly see that networking hasn't made us 'lazy'.
II - Privacy v the Right to Know
a. My opponent has misunderstood my argument. What I was referring to was not the parent sitting over the shoulder of the child every waking moment; I was referring to the fact that, on these sites, many parents will create accounts and add their children as friends; this allows them outside access to the account, which allows them to see the personal information posted, the pictures posted, and anything else on the outside that would seem insecure; thus, I stand by my statement that social networking sites allow parents to maintain their child's safety without the necessity of a direct invasion of privacy.
b. As far as private messages are concerned, if a child receives anything that seems a bit strange in the inbox, then it is the child's responsibility to report this to a parent, or the site staff, or some other responsible adult; if they insist on keeping this a secret, then this is only the fault of the child, since no one else was alerted to these happenings (the site staff obviously can't take action against a possible threat that they don't know exists).
III - Online safety
a. My opponent fails to understand that, with chat rooms, a person can seem cool at the time, and so it seems fine to give away an e-mail or IM address; after that, it's far easier for a person to harass someone over an IM conversation, since, when the window is closed, the conversation magically disappears, leaving no evidence behind; with Facebook or MySpace, the messages clearly remain in the inbox, and posts will remain clear on the wall or otherwise; I'm not saying that IM, e-mail, etc. are bad; I'm simply saying that networking sites streamline the benefits of these services while also providing a bit more oversight; remember, the security of social sites can always be bolstered; IM, on the other hand, is generally left out in the cold.
b. Look back to argument II a; as I've stated, social sites allow parents to create accounts, and oversee the pictures, personal information, etc. that is posted by their children, which allows parents to regulate it; this means that children are still allowed to socialize with friends, while being better protected from predators; the only harm here would be the children deliberately keeping secrets from parents, and in this case, the fault is entirely the child's for choosing not to report something suspicious.
On the flip side with Con's case:
1. Education
a. The problem is, the children ultimately have the choice to log in, or to do their school work; it is the child's responsibility to get this work done, as I'm sure my opponent and I can agree; the child knows full well that the work isn't getting done while on Facebook, and so the child is consciously shirking responsibility; however, this is entirely non-unique to social networking; the same could be said for hanging out with friends, or online gaming, or playing outside, or whatever recreational activity you choose; ultimately, the blame for not completing the work does not lie with the sites or the other activities; it lies with the child, who gave into temptation as opposed to carrying out his/her responsibility.
b. Many teachers are taking advantage of these sites, and are creating accounts for themselves so that they might hold their students accountable for actions, and also update them on assignments, tests, etc. In fact, one particular open-source networking site, Elgg, allows students and teachers alike to create profiles, blogs, and is entirely intended to enhance the educational experience by giving students a place to go outside of class to contact teachers, keep current on assignments, projects, and quizzes, and to ensure, to the best of their abilities, that they don't shirk responsibility; if anything, the adaptability of networking sites is doing more good for education than anything.
2. Sexual Predators
a. The fact is, these accounts, as my opponent tells us, were deleted; this proves that many of the oversight measures were effective in dealing with threats; further oversight would include concerned friends, and a watchful parent; again, if a child is being sexually harassed, somebody needs to be told for action to be taken; after all, police and ambulances aren't going to show up if you don't call 911 first.
3. Computer and Financial Harm
a. As my opponent points out, many of these sites have trouble with viruses, bugs, glitches, phishing, etc.; however, my opponent also unwittingly points out that these sites have DISCLAIMERS that WARN users about these kinds of dangers; obviously, if a site has taken the time to put out a warning about this kind of danger, users would be far past incompetent not to heed those warnings; any risks taken against the disclaimer are at the user's own risk.
4. Time and Obesity
a. Exactly; every hobby takes time; however, this does not mean that a person has to be on their account "constantly", as my opponent would have you believe; social networking is simply like many other hobbies, nothing more; my opponent doesn't see the fact that, for the person using the site, being able to easily socialize with friends online and plan outings is beneficial to them; plus, as my opponent also unintentionally reveals, any hobby would take away from the possible time needed to exercise or read a book; this is entirely non-unique to networking sites.
b. Obesity, as far as I am aware, isn't directly caused by social networking; it's caused by things like a poor diet, slow metabolism, gross lack of exercise (even people who use Facebook can take 20 minutes from their day every once in a while), and pure genetics; so, the argument about obese Americans, while true, doesn't really correspond to social networking.
5. Harmful information
a. This is not the fault of social networking sites; a lot of information can be taken from a lot of places, just because of the internet's open nature; people have things stolen like their social security number, their credit card number, their bank account information, etc. So, with using the internet, there's always an imperative to keep information safe; plus, on most social networking sites I've seen, users are (generally) smart enough not to post direct addresses on their profiles, somewhat eliminating this risk.
b. Users have to exercise a certain amount of discretion when posting sensitive information online; again, look back a point my opponent previously mentioned; these sites have disclaimers warning against this kind of situation; so, as I've proven, the responsibility to avoid these risks and post only safe information lies solely with the user.
*Addendum*
With few characters left, let me remind everyone that my opponent entirely DROPPED her argument from round 1, so this definitely goes Pro.
Now, I look forward to my opponent's response, I again wish her good luck, and with that, I'm off to lunch. :) Report this Argument
Debate Round No. 2
Con *raises white flag* I concede, as long as I still get to live. :) Report this Argument Pro Well, you've heard it from my opponent folks, an open concession; needless to say, once you flow through my arguments from Round 2, and add that to her recent forfeiture, it's clear who you need to vote for in today's debate.
Sometimes I really wish that I could take trophies off of people that I've beaten, like the way hunters take the head, or the foot, or the pelt of an animal that they kill. We should get one of those.
Privacy: Do social networking sites uphold individual privacy?
Yes § Users have a choice. Most websites have a privacy feature with which the user may make items such as their profile, pictures, or blog be made private or available to only their friends. Besides, users have the choice whether to go on social networking sites or not.
No § Social networking sites give too great of access and control to governments.ACLU. "Facebook Not as Private as You Might Think" Retrieved 11.29.07 - "Thanks to some pre-Internet Supreme Court cases such as Smith v. Maryland, the Fourth Amendment does not apply to information held by a third parties like Facebook. The government does not need to have a court-ordered warrant to obtain your personal information held by Facebook- it just needs to ask for it with a subpoena. In the future, the information you have stored on Facebook could come back to haunt you. Even if you delete your profile, Facebook holds onto your information for what they decide is a “reasonable” amount of time."
Friendship: Are social networking sites benefiting friendships?
Yes § Social networking sites create great opportunities for making friends.
No § Social networking sites distract from quality interpersonal connections.The most valuable connections are not made over the Internet but in person-to-person interactions. While social networking can be used to establish person-to-person interactions, it more frequently results in massive amounts of time being spent online interacting at a distance. § Social networking sites make it possible to maintain fictional identity.Social networking sites allow people to create a "mask" and claim to be a completely different person from who they really are.
Professional networking: Do social networking sites benefit career networking?
Yes § Social networking sites create great opportunities for professional networking. Since "it's not what you know, but who you know", this is very important. § Social networking sites enable individuals to move toward making face-to-face meetings: Social networking sites are a starting place for face-to-face meetings between professionals.
No § Social networking sites do not allow for trusting professional relationships to be established. Face-to-face conversations and hand-shakes are still the most important element of sound professional networking.
Information: Are social networking sites a good place to exchange information?
Yes § Social networking sites are a great place to exchange information.
No § Social networking sites are a major distraction from learning. People are spending far too much time on social networking sites, and away from books, newspapers, and other educational resources. The information contained in social networking sites is generally shallow and trivial as compared to these other valuable sources of learning. Since there is limited time in the day and in life, that a growing proportion of that time is being spent by individuals on social networking sites is a major problem to the general education of the public.
Commercial use of info: Is the commercial use of personal information ethical?
Yes § Social networking sites have agreements that explicitly say that information can be used commercially in any way. If an individual doesn't want their information to be used commercially, than they shouldn't enter into agreements with these social networking sites. Or, they should close their account. § More targeted advertising is of greater value to the consumer. Why should we complain that advertisers will have more information about us to advertise to us things that we are more interested in buying? Advertising is not evil. Ads inform the consumer of a product that they may judge to be of value in their lives and worth spending money on. No product is being forced on consumers by ads, but offered as something that the consumer might deem worthy to purchase. Therefore, it should be welcome that social networking sites offer advertising firms information that can bring products of greater potential value to a particular consumer's attention.
No § It is unethical for social network sites to use personal information to enable advertisers to better target you as a consumer. Personal information should not be used for commercial purposes. It is too invasive, and can cause emotional damage. For example, what if your profile indicates that your boy friend just broke up with you, for example. An ad agency is allowed to obtain this information and use it to send you an advertisement on break-ups. This could do emotional damage.
§ Social networking sites are a major distraction to students in classrooms with computers or wireless internet.Students that are on social networking sites in schools are distracted from real learning. They may be in a classroom during a lecture and have their laptop out, considered acceptable and useful for note-taking, but are instead browsing friends' profiles on a social networking site. Students can easily get away with this because their screens generally face away from the professor and lecturer. The temptation is apparently too great to resist, and it is unreasonable to expect that teachers can somehow regulate this problem effectively; they can't walk around the room constantly checking what is on students' screens. This problem is so widespread, so unresolvable by other means, and so unfortunate to quality education, that it is reasonable for schools to take the decisive step of blocking student access to these sites through school or classroom computers or over local area wireless networks in the classroom.
No
§ Social networking sites can be beneficial in the classroom for the exchange of information. § Social networking sites can be an interesting environment for class groups to meet. § Students should be taught responsible practices, instead of being blocked outright from these sites. § Social networking sites help people keep in touch.Social networking sites are a great way to keep in touch with relatives or friends currently residing far aw
Debate: Harmfulness of Facebook
Privacy: Does Facebook infringe upon privacy rights?
Pro § Facebook news feeds generally makes people feel exposed and invaded:Danah Boyd, social networking scholar and blogger noted in 2006, "privacy is an experience that people have, not a state of data....When people feel exposed or invaded, there's a privacy issue."[1] § Many Facebook users don't understand the privacy implications of allowing news feeds (Therefore, News Feed should be an opt-in rather than an opt-out function). While it is true that users can opt-out of News Feed, this assumes that they would understand the implications of not opting out. The implication of not opting out of news feed is quite profound. Users can view every action you take on Facebook. This creates a general window of public observation of an individual's activities that can have a profound effect on the behaviour of that individual. Some cite this environment of constant observation as a panopticon, a “constant view of individuals through parasocietal mechanisms that influence behavior simply because of the possibility of being observed.” This environment of the constant potential for observation and surveillance dramatically effects behavior by making individuals constantly on-guard under the public observation glass. Yet, those that choose not to opt-out of "news feed" are not likely to consider the profound behavioral implications of these actions. Also, Facebook tends to hide the privacy features of people's accounts and sets the settings to a very visible default. An example of the effects of this ishttp://www.youropenbook.org/, which is an independent search engine for Facebook statuses. § Social networking sites give too great of access and control to governments.ACLU. "Facebook Not as Private as You Might Think" Retrieved 11.29.07 - "Thanks to some pre-Internet Supreme Court cases such as Smith v. Maryland, the Fourth Amendment does not apply to information held by a third parties like Facebook. The government does not need to have a court-ordered warrant to obtain your personal information held by Facebook- it just needs to ask for it with a subpoena. § Not all information is disclosed voluntarily.Given that anyone can submit anything on Facebook, it means that this person can share any information about any individual without permission. This infringes upon the right of every individual to privacy, which is based on sharing personal information selectively and voluntarily. § Commercial reasons not to promote tight security.Facebook does not motivate its users to secure their profiles and personal information more, because it has financial incentives to yield as much information from the users as possible. These include targeted adverts, selling personal information, etc.
Con § Facebook's news-feed now has an off-switch, giving users the choice to adjust privacy settings.Choice is essential to privacy. If users can adjust privacy settings, than privacy issues largely disappear. It can no longer be argued in this context that Facebook or other social networking sites are violating the privacy of their users. Rather, the issue becomes that users are voluntarily opening themselves up to the world at their own risk. § Public information has a moderating effect on individuals.It is good that information about individuals is made more public. Social judgment has a positive moderating effect. Confucius actually said that he was very lucky that all of his actions were publicly scrutinized, as it ensured that he was careful and prudent in making decisions. Similarly, News Feed may make an individual think twice before they join an extremist group on Facebook, as it might risk a negative backlash of judgment from those in their network that view that action on News Feed.
Friendships: Does Facebook harm relationships?
Pro
§ Social networking sites distract from quality interpersonal connections.The most valuable connections are not made over the Internet but in person-to-person interactions. While social networking can be used to establish person-to-person interactions, it more frequently results in massive amounts of time being spent online interacting at a distance. § Facebook undermines the value of interpersonal relationships.Facebook restricts communication to a couple of words or sentences, instead of promoting real personal contact. People therefore socialize less, and their relationships become more superficial. § Facebook causes the harmful spread of gossip.As anything can be said on Facebook and anyone with the correct permissions can comment there is a risk of a gossip spread. This may be seen by the object of the discussion which may cause issues within the relationship. Gossiping can be done publicly or privately on Facebook, so it promotes bitchiness, gossip, bullying and being two-faced.
Con
§ Long-distance friendships.Facebook helps people stay in touch, no matter how far they may be from each other. § Facebook is a symptom, not a cause.Our society is changing dramatically and Facebook is a mere byproduct of these changes. We live our lives differently, in diverse environments and social networking sites just reflect our altered attitudes.
Crime: Does Facebook present a threat?
Pro
§ Social networking sites make it possible to maintain fictional identity.Social networking sites allow people to create a "mask" and claim to be a completely different person from who they really are. § Facebook suits criminals perfectly.Thanks to "open" privacy setting and the main purpose of Facebook - sharing as much information as possible - this social networking site becomes a safe haven for stalkers, pedophiles, etc.
Con
§ Information is disclosed and shared voluntarily and based on privacy setting.Users are rational people who can protect themselves by adjusting privacy settings and choosing which information they want to share.
Information: Does Facebook help spread "undesirable" information? Does it matter?
Pro
§ Social networking sites are a major distraction from learning.People are spending far too much time on social networking sites, and away from books, newspapers, and other educational resources. The information contained in social networking sites is generally shallow and trivial as compared to these other valuable sources of learning. Since there is limited time in the day and in life, that a growing proportion of that time is being spent by individuals on social networking sites is a major problem to the general education of the public. § Facebook fosters hate speech.Racist, xenophobic, extremist and other "hate speech" groups attract hundreds of members, who are not prosecuted, although hate speech is (in most countries) illegal. § Inappropriate content is not restricted by age.Even though Facebook - in theory - tries to prevent young children from having their own profile, in practice are its controls ineffective, as the only "proof" of someone's age is his or her own confirmation. Therefore even young children have access to certain inappropriate content (groups, fan pages, videos, photos), which can be morally damaging.
Con
§ Facebook promotes freedom of speech.Facebook is sometimes the only tool to express someone's opinion in a politically unfree country that restricts basic human rights and freedoms. § Inappropriate content is being reported and removed. § Facebook can be used for educational purposes.Because Facebook makes information- and file-sharing easier, it is an ideal tool for students to share materials or discuss important issues.
Unique harms: Are there any harms unique to Facebook?
Pro
§ Facebook is too interconnected.Facebook not only helps spread information in form of videos, texts, and pictures, but it also reaches wide audience. Any cyberbullying, cyber threats, or hate speech has serious consequences precisely because it can provide much more data to many more people than a single web focusing on sharing videos, for example.
Con
§ All possible harms are not unique to Facebook.Privacy issues, cyberbullying, inappropriate content. All of these are innate to not just Facebook, but all social networking sites. Other problems connected with Facebook - such as waste of time - are inherent to a large amount of other websites (games, chat...).
Waste of time: Is Facebook just a waste of time?
Pro
§ Facebook does not provide valuable content. § Facebook exacerbates negative effects of entertainment websites.Facebook offers a lot of distraction, which often results in procrastination in front of a screen. People thus spend more time engaging with computers, which can have negative health implications.
Con
§ Facebook does provide valuable information.Certain fan pages or groups can be edifying, informing about different cultures, religions, traditions...
Human factor: Is it Facebook, or its users doing harm?
Pro
§ "A weapon cannot be separated from a murderer."Facebook is a powerful tool to do harm, and although this harm is, in effect, done by people, it is carried out through this website, which enables them to do so.
Con
§ "Guns don't kill people; people kill people."It is not Facebook doing harm, it is its users. Had Facebook not existed, people would find other ways to hurt/harm each other.
Culture: Does Facebook harm our culture?
Pro
§ Facebook enhances stereotypes.There are many groups and fan pages that enhance our cultural biases, ranging from "Heyy Babe Lets Put Up The England Flags.. LOL Jk, The Muslims Dnt Like It!" fan page to "brunettes are better" groups.
Con
§ Facebook undermines stereotypes.Dozens of groups and fan pages are trying to undermine social and cultural biases, such as "Muslims are not terrorists", or "We Christians love Pakistan".
Commercial use of info: Is the commercial use of personal information unethical?
Pro
§ It is unethical for social network sites to use personal information to enable advertisers to better target you as a consumer.Personal information should not be used for commercial purposes. It is too invasive, and can cause emotional damage. For example, what if your profile indicates that your boy friend just broke up with you, for example. An ad agency is allowed to obtain this information and use it to send you an advertisement on break-ups. This could do emotional damage.
Con
§ Social networking sites have agreements that explicitly say that information can be used commercially in any way.If an individual doesn't want their information to be used commercially, than they shouldn't enter into agreements with these social networking sites. Or, they should close their account. § More targeted advertising is of greater value to the consumer.Why should we complain that advertisers will have more information about us to advertise to us things that we are more interested in buying? Advertising is not evil. Ads inform the consumer of a product that they may judge to be of value in their lives and worth spending money on. No product is being forced on consumers by ads, but offered as something that the consumer might deem worthy to purchase. Therefore, it should be welcome that social networking sites offer advertising firms information that can bring products of greater potential value to a particular consumer's attention.
ByMichelle St. Onge Staff Writer Published: Monday, March 7, 2011 Updated: Monday, March 7, 2011 01:03
Michelle St. Onge / Facebook.com
Currently, there are dozens of free sites that range from reuniting and meeting people, photo and video sharing, blogging, RSS updates, music, hobbies and interests, business, academics, and the list goes on. Nevertheless, what all these booming sites have in common is that they are powerful in connecting various societies of our planet. But what are they all about? I have researched and compiled a list of pros and cons so you, the readers, can make your own decision about whether or not you want to go home and continue using your Facebook, Twitter, MySpace and Livejournal account.
Note: These are not my opinions, nor those of The Unfiltered Lens. This research is based on studies and facts compiled by others.
PROSocial Networking Sites 1. Social networking sites allow people to create new relationships and reconnect with friends and family. Increased communication, even online, strengthens relationships. 2. Social networking sites allow for creative expression in a new medium. They provide free messaging, blogging, photo storage, games, event invitations, and many other services to anyone with access to a computer and the Internet. 3. Social networking sites bring people with common interests together, offer exposure to new ideas from around the world, and lower inhibitions to overcome social anxiety. People who have a difficulty communicating in person are more comfortable interacting via the Internet. 4. 60 million Americans received help with major life issues (changing jobs, finding a new place to live, buying a car, and caring for someone with an illness) from people in their social networks in 2006. These people said social networking sites helped them connect with friends and experts who assisted in their decisions. 5. 59% of students with access to the Internet report that they use social networking sites to discuss educational topics including career and college planning, and 50% use the sites to talk about school assignments. Some parents and teachers say that using these sites helps students improve their reading, writing, and conflict resolution skills, learn to express themselves more clearly, and meet new and different kinds of students from around the world. 6. Social media helps low-income kids become more familiar with computers and related technology. One study showed that nearly three quarters of children from poor households have profiles on MySpace or Facebook. By using these websites, they have learned how to edit and upload photos and videos, and have become experienced in using html code to personalize their profile pages. 7. Studies have shown that being part of a social network has a positive impact, including increased quality of life and a reduction in the risk of health problems. They help improve stroke recovery, memory retention, and overall well-being. 8. Internet users have larger social networks than non-users, and using social networking sites to maintain those relationships facilitates more face-to-face interaction. Internet users are augmenting their offline social networks, not replacing them. 9. Social media can be a powerful tool for social change and an alternative to more traditional methods of communication. During the protests of the Iranian election in June 2009, protestors used Twitter to circumvent government control over phones and the media. Twitter was so important that the US State Department asked Twitter to delay a network upgrade that would have taken the website offline at a busy time of day in Iran. Twitter complied and rescheduled the downtime to 1:30 am Tehran time. The ability to remain anonymous helped protect people who were spreading information in real time. 10. To make social networking sites safer for children, the sites have minimum age requirements and default settings based on the user's age to protect children. MySpace, for example, requires users to be at least 14 years old, and the profiles of all users under the age of 16 are automatically set to "private" so they cannot be found during a general search. 11. Social media sites are expanding from general interest to more specific uses that benefit society. For example, sites have been created for medical purposes such as dealing with life altering diseases, alcoholism, drug addiction, weight loss, and autism. Social networking sites with a specific focus help introduce people to others who are dealing with similar issues and provide information, contacts, peer support, and encouragement. CONSocial Networking Sites 1. Social networking sites entice people to spend more time online and less time interacting face-to-face. The sites offer many time wasting activities that supplant more productive activities. Teens spend an average of nine hours per week on social networking sites. 2. Teens growing up with these sites may not be aware that the information they post is public and that photos and text can be retrieved even after deletion. Consequences from over-sharing personal information include vulnerability to sexual or financial predators and lost job opportunities from employers finding embarrassing photos or comments. 3. Social networking sites have no way to verify that people are who they claim to be, leaving people vulnerable to solicitations from online predators who are able to mask their true identities. In Feb. 2009, MySpace identified 90,000 registered sex offenders with profiles on the site, while Facebook declined to reveal how many were present on its site. Even if the sites agree to remove sex offenders, they cannot identify all of them or stop them from creating new accounts. 4. Social networking sites make cyber-bullying, a type of bullying that occurs online, easier and more public than bullying through other online activities such as e-mail and instant messaging. A 2009 study found that 17.3% of middle school students have been victims of cyber-bullying. Victims often experience a drop in grades, decreased self-esteem, and other symptoms of depression. 5. The US Marine Corps banned the use of all social media sites on its networks because the sites are "a proven haven for malicious actors and content and are particularly high risk due to information exposure, user generated content and targeting by adversaries." The entire Department of Defense is considering a ban on social networking sites because of concerns over security threats and potential computer viruses. 6. The use of social networking sites can cause personality and brain disorders in children, such as the inability to have real conversations, limited attention spans, a need for instant gratification, Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), and self-centered personalities. The fast pace of the sites may rewire the brain with repeated exposure because parts of the brain used for traditional, offline activities become under used. 7. The hours per day of face-to-face socializing have declined as the use of social media has increased. People who use these sites frequently are prone to social isolation. Parents spend less time with their children and couples spend less time together even when they live in the same house, because they are using the Internet instead of interacting with each other. 8. A 2007 study found that workers using Facebook in the office were costing Australian businesses up to $4.5 billion (US) per year. A Feb. 2009 report stated that social networking sites were costing UK businesses an estimated $12.5 billion (US) annually. Numbers for lost revenue from lower worker productivity when employees use social networking sites in the US are not available, but one study found that two-thirds of US workers with Facebook accounts access that site during work hours. 9. A false sense of security may leave social networking site users vulnerable to security attacks such as hacking, leaking sensitive information, and sending viruses. People trust messages sent through social networking sites and consider them more legitimate than e-mails. However, social networks do not scan messages for viruses or phishing scams, while most e-mail accounts do scan the messages for spam and viruses through antivirus software. 10. The public nature of online profiles creates security risks about which most users are unaware. Cyber-criminals can gather information to be used for identity theft from social networking profiles, such as birthdays, pet names, mothers' maiden names, names of children, and other details often used in passwords and security questions. Offline crime may result from posting personal information, like home robberies committed after a person announces vacation plans and alerts criminals when the home will be left unattended. 11. Social networking sites were created to make money, not to improve peoples' lives. These websites use networks of online friends to accumulate data about people for the purpose of selling advertising. The sites place cookies on the users' computers, gather information, and track interests to show personalized ads. These advertising practices may constitute an invasion of privacy. *information provided by socialnetworking.procon.org
Pro & Con Arguments: "Are social networking sites good for our society?"
PRO Social Networking Sites
Social networking sites allow people to create new relationships and reconnect with friends and family. Increased communication, even online, strengthens relationships.
Social networking sites allow for creative expression in a new medium. They provide free messaging, blogging, photo storage, games, event invitations, and many other services to anyone with access to a computer and the Internet.
Social networking sites bring people with common interests together, offer exposure to new ideas from around the world, and lower inhibitions to overcome social anxiety. People who have a difficulty communicating in person are more comfortable interacting via the Internet.
[21] (changing jobs, finding a new place to live, buying a car, and caring for someone with an illness) from people in their social networks in 2006. These people said social networking sites helped them connect with friends and experts who assisted in their decisions.
[22] report that they use social networking sites to discuss educational topics including career and college planning, and 50% use the sites to talk about school assignments. Some parents and teachers say that using these sites helps students improve their reading, writing, and conflict resolution skills, learn to express themselves more clearly, and meet new and different kinds of students from around the world. [2]
Social media helps low-income kids become more familiar with computers and related technology. One study showed that nearly three quarters of children from poor households have profiles on MySpace or Facebook. By using these websites, they have learned how to edit and upload photos and videos, and have become experienced in using html code to personalize their profile pages. [3]
Studies have shown that being part of a social network has a positive impact, including increased quality of life and a reduction in the risk of health problems. They help improve stroke recovery, memory retention, and overall well-being. [4]
Internet users have larger social networks than non-users, and using social networking sites to maintain those relationships facilitates more face-to-face interaction. Internet users are augmenting their offline social networks, not replacing them. [5]
Social media can be a powerful tool for social change and an alternative to more traditional methods of communication. During the protests of the Iranian election in June 2009, protestors used Twitter to circumvent government control over phones and the media. Twitter was so important that the US State Department asked Twitter to delay a network upgrade that would have taken the website offline at a busy time of day in Iran. Twitter complied and rescheduled the downtime to 1:30 am Tehran time. The ability to remain anonymous helped protect people who were spreading information in real time.
To make social networking sites safer for children, the sites have minimum age requirements and default settings based on the user's age to protect children. MySpace, for example, requires users to be at least 14 years old, and the profiles of all users under the age of 16 are automatically set to "private" so they cannot be found during a general search.
Social media sites are expanding from general interest to more specific uses that benefit society. For example, sites have been created for medical purposes such as dealing with life altering diseases, alcoholism, drug addiction, weight loss, and autism. Social networking sites with a specific focus help introduce people to others who are dealing with similar issues and provide information, contacts, peer support, and encouragement.
CON Social Networking Sites
Social networking sites entice people to spend more time online and less time interacting face-to-face. The sites offer many time wasting activities that supplant more productive activities. Teens spend an average of nine hours per week on social networking sites (950 KB)
Teens growing up with these sites may not be aware that the information they post is public and that photos and text can be retrieved even after deletion. Consequences from over-sharing personal information include vulnerability to sexual or financial predators and lost job opportunities from employers finding embarrassing photos or comments.
Social networking sites have no way to verify that people are who they claim to be, leaving people vulnerable to solicitations from online predators who are able to mask their true identities. In Feb. 2009, MySpace identified 90,000 registered sex offenders with profiles on the site, while Facebook declined to reveal how many were present on its site. Even if the sites agree to remove sex offenders, they cannot identify all of them or stop them from creating new accounts. [6]
Social networking sites make cyberbullying, a type of bullying that occurs online, easier and more public than bullying through other online activities such as email and instant messaging. A 2009 study found that 17.3% of middle school students have been victims of cyberbullying. [7] Victims often experience a drop in grades, decreased self-esteem, and other symptoms of depression. [8]
The US Marine Corps banned the use of all social media sites on its networks because the sites are "a proven haven for malicious actors and content and are particularly high risk due to information exposure, user generated content and targeting by adversaries." [9] The entire Department of Defense is considering a ban on social networking sites because of concerns over security threats and potential computer viruses.
The use of social networking sites can cause personality and brain disorders in children, such as the inability to have real conversations, limited attention spans, a need for instant gratification, Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), and self-centered personalities. The fast pace of the sites may rewire the brain with repeated exposure because parts of the brain used for traditional, offline activities become underused. [10]
The hours per day of face-to-face socializing have declined as the use of social media has increased. People who use these sites frequently are prone to social isolation. Parents spend less time with their children and couples spend less time together even when they live in the same house, because they are using the Internet instead of interacting with each other. [11]
A 2007 study found that workers using Facebook in the office were costing Australian businesses up to $4.5 billion (US) per year. [12] A Feb. 2009 report stated that social networking sites were costing UK businesses an estimated $12.5 billion (US) annually. [13] Numbers for lost revenue from lower worker productivity when employees use social networking sites in the US are not available, but one study found that two-thirds of US workers with Facebook accounts access that site during work hours. [14]
A false sense of security may leave social networking site users vulnerable to security attacks such as hacking, leaking sensitive information, and sending viruses. People trust messages sent through social networking sites and consider them more legitimate than emails. However, social networks do not scan messages for viruses or phishing scams, while most email accounts do scan the messages for spam and viruses through antivirus software.
The public nature of online profiles creates security risks about which most users are unaware. Cybercriminals can gather information to be used for identity theft from social networking profiles, such as birthdays, pet names, mothers' maiden names, names of children, and other details often used in passwords and security questions. Offline crime may result from posting personal information, like home robberies committed after a person announces vacation plans and alerts criminals when the home will be left unattended.
Social networking sites were created to make money, not to improve peoples' lives. These websites use networks of online friends to accumulate data about people for the purpose of selling advertising. The sites place cookies on the users' computers, gather information, and track interests to show personalized ads. These advertising practices may constitute an invasion of privacy.
Today, I am against the resolution, Resolved: That, on balance, social networking Web sites have a positive impact on the United States. Social networking sites have had a negative impact on the United States.
My first conjunctions is as followed;
--Social Networking is potentially going to harm to persons using them. One example of this is Megan Meier, who took her life after an old friends mom posed as a boy on myspace and began harassing her.
When a social networking site does nothing to protect users of its site, we see it as unfit. Just as we would see a mother unfit to raise a child if she didn't protect it from danger.
Pro
I'd like to welcome my opponent to the site; to get better acquainted, I figured that I would take this debate challenge, and observe her debating style for myself; not to mention, I wanted to expand my horizons a bit, and talk about something a bit more lighthearted.
To clarify one thing: If it wasn't already known, then social networking sites are things like Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter, as opposed to dating sites like Match.com, Chemistry.com, etc.
To things manageable, I will make only a couple of opening arguments, and I will briefly refute the Con's.
I - Social networking is beneficial.
Man is, by nature, a social creature; that is, people need people. As technology advances, so does mankind's means of communicating and socializing; for example, we've developed things such as the telegraph/telegram, mail service, telephone/cell phone, video chat, and now, we are looking at social networking sites; thus, we can see that, because social networking has increased the ability of people to communicate and socialize, whether city, state, nation, or even worldwide, social networking sites have clearly had a positive impact on society.
II - Social networking sites balance a child's privacy and a parent's right to know.
A classic clash always happens when pitting the right to privacy of a child against the right to know of a parent; however, social networking sites find a happy medium, so that neither side is overlooked; for example, on Facebook, a teenager may have private conversations with a friend over the private messaging system, but the parent of this teenager will still be able to keep track of things such as posts made to other friends' walls, pictures posted, etc. Social networking sites give parents the ability to keep tabs on many of their child's online postings, such as pictures and personal information, but without having to directly invade on their child's privacy; this again proves that social networking sites have had a positive effect on society.
III - Social networking sites provide a degree of online safety.
While all websites and internet users are vulnerable to some degree, the openness and oversight provided by the staff of social networking sites, give or take a few situations, ensures a higher degree of safety than might be found elsewhere on the internet. While these sites don't have to take direct responsibility for their users, there's still a higher sense of security than would be found in unchecked e-mail services, instant messengers, and chat rooms full of shady characters; so, to some extent, social networking sites provide all the benefits of other services, such as IM and e-mail, but without the fear of being stalked by a predator or serial killer [though I can't account for the harmless creepers that tend to accumulate on some sites. :)].
Now, to move on to the Con's sole contention.
1. Social networking is potentially harmful.
a. A lot of different things can be potentially harmful; however, simply because something has the potential to be misused does not mean that it has had a negative effect on society; prescription medication, for example, can (and often is) abused by the people to whom it is prescribed; however, this potential for abuse does not mean that we do away with prescription drugs completely, and it is the same with social networking sites.
b. In the case with Megan Meier, this girl was already reported to suffer from depression, was on several medications, and since the third grade, had been kept under the careful eye of her psychiatrist [http://en.wikipedia.org...]; as we can see, Megan was already in a fragile condition; as we can see, it was not MySpace that was responsible for Megan's tragic suicide; rather, this unfortunate event can be attributed to Lori Drew, Ashley Grills, and the several other people who aided in operating the account and harassing Megan; clearly, MySpace didn't intend for their site to be used in such a way, and this is evidenced by the fact that Ms. Drew, among others, was brought to trial, not the MySpace staff; for example, if someone is shot in a nightclub, nobody holds the nightclub staff responsible for being unaware that the shooting would happen; they hold the shooter responsible, as he is the one that committed the detestable act; in the same way, MySpace cannot be held accountable for the malicious acts of other people, and this instance, while tragic, is not a negative effect of social networking sites, but merely the misuse of them.
I will stand down for the moment, and allow my opponent to chew on my opening arguments for a bit. Good luck, Con!
Good Morning, and thank you for welcoming me. To begin the second round of our debate, I will first demolish my opponents case, then move on to my own.
I- My opponents first conjunction what that Social Networking Web Sites are beneficial to Americans. I do agree with my opponent that people need people. But long before we had social networking sites we had other ways of communicating. We picked up a phone, or wrote an actual letter. Have Americans become so lazy that they can't do this?
II- The second conjunction of my opponent's case was that social networking is a balance between child's privacy and the parents right to know. Every parent wants to think that their child is smart enough to know what to post and do online. Unless you plan to sit with your child every time they use the computer, and watch their every move you can't insure they are doing exactly what they say. Another fact is that, if you don't allow your child access to the internet at home, they may be getting online and using social networking sites at friends' houses.
--As my opponent brought up, a child can receive private messages online from anyone. On facebook and/or myspace, you don't have to have a person as a friend to send them messages.
III- My opponents last point is that social networking provide a degree of online safety. As many people seem to forget, social networking sites allow you to search any name, place, or group. It is a lot easier for you to search a random name, or look for a person in your area on a social networking site because they give you results. As for IM, you have to know a persons complete address to add them. You can't just type in a name and get their email. So social networking sites allow easier access to persons information. While we are talking about gaining persons information, social networking sites have many categories that you fill out, along with name (first and last), age, and where you live/hometown. This allows shady characters to find you, and follow you. And they could potentially steal information about you.
Now to move on to my case.
I- Social Networking Sites effect children's education.
With more and more social networking sites being created, children are using them more. When children get home one of the first things they do is log into their "space" or profile and begin chatting. This is effecting their school work, because they aren't spending enough time or giving their all. Along with not spending enough time on work, students are spending time at night online and not sleeping. Without the sleep required by their body, they have a harder time paying attention in class or do not complete work.
II- Social networking sites allow sexual predators easy access to persons' information.
With over 250,000,000 users on Facebook a vast majority of them are sexual predators. In the year 2007 Facebook deleted 90,000 sexual predator accounts. Those being the ones reported to traced. And since May they have deleted 5,585 accounts. These sexual predators use social networking sites because they are easy access and you can lie easily on them. You don't have to put your actual name, age, or picture. This makes it very convenient to gain trust from somebody and use it against them.
III- Social networking sites can harm your computer and cost money.
Both Myspace and Facebook (along with others) have disclaimers telling you to beware or odd friend requests and about opening messages from people you don't know. They can harm viruses, and other computer glitches. Unmarked emails can hold trackers that allow the sender to hack your account, take information, or use the information against you. Trackers may also allow that person to follow what you do online, like visit the website of your bank. Which gives them more access to your accounts and passwords.
IX- Social networking takes massive amounts of time.
Like any hobby, social networking sites need to be maintained. Constantly updating your account, checking to see which friends are online, and seeing what everybody is doing takes a great amount of time. This can cut into time used to do something more productive or beneficial, such as exercising or reading a new book. We need to face the fact that Americans (some) are along the most obese persons. Although this is important (maintaining health), it is not one of my mom important points.
X- Social Networking sites allow simple information to be used against you.
As talked about on HLN this morning, information you post can be used against you. Simply saying that you are going on vacation can allow others to take advantage of the situation and break into your house. Not only are you losing your possessions, but you will lose money replacing them.
I would like to apologize to my opponent for taking so long to reply, I've been working on my boxes for extemp.
Good Luck Aff.
Pro
To keep things oriented, I will proceed in much the same fashion as my opponent, starting with my contentions, then moving to hers, and then covering the new arguments (which, to my knowledge, weren't in the constructive, and probably shouldn't be included, but will be covered by me regardless).
I - Lazy Americans
a. Though people don't write letters nearly as much anymore, this is more for convenience than anything; though letters might take days to arrive, a message sent through a social networking site such as Facebook allows nearly instantaneous transmission; and, despite what my opponent would have you believe, social networking has not erased the postal service or the phone companies; many people still retain home phones, cell phones, and, as far as I am aware, I still get bills, reports, and other things through the mail each day; there are some things that you simply can't ship through a social networking site, so we can clearly see that networking hasn't made us 'lazy'.
II - Privacy v the Right to Know
a. My opponent has misunderstood my argument. What I was referring to was not the parent sitting over the shoulder of the child every waking moment; I was referring to the fact that, on these sites, many parents will create accounts and add their children as friends; this allows them outside access to the account, which allows them to see the personal information posted, the pictures posted, and anything else on the outside that would seem insecure; thus, I stand by my statement that social networking sites allow parents to maintain their child's safety without the necessity of a direct invasion of privacy.
b. As far as private messages are concerned, if a child receives anything that seems a bit strange in the inbox, then it is the child's responsibility to report this to a parent, or the site staff, or some other responsible adult; if they insist on keeping this a secret, then this is only the fault of the child, since no one else was alerted to these happenings (the site staff obviously can't take action against a possible threat that they don't know exists).
III - Online safety
a. My opponent fails to understand that, with chat rooms, a person can seem cool at the time, and so it seems fine to give away an e-mail or IM address; after that, it's far easier for a person to harass someone over an IM conversation, since, when the window is closed, the conversation magically disappears, leaving no evidence behind; with Facebook or MySpace, the messages clearly remain in the inbox, and posts will remain clear on the wall or otherwise; I'm not saying that IM, e-mail, etc. are bad; I'm simply saying that networking sites streamline the benefits of these services while also providing a bit more oversight; remember, the security of social sites can always be bolstered; IM, on the other hand, is generally left out in the cold.
b. Look back to argument II a; as I've stated, social sites allow parents to create accounts, and oversee the pictures, personal information, etc. that is posted by their children, which allows parents to regulate it; this means that children are still allowed to socialize with friends, while being better protected from predators; the only harm here would be the children deliberately keeping secrets from parents, and in this case, the fault is entirely the child's for choosing not to report something suspicious.
On the flip side with Con's case:
1. Education
a. The problem is, the children ultimately have the choice to log in, or to do their school work; it is the child's responsibility to get this work done, as I'm sure my opponent and I can agree; the child knows full well that the work isn't getting done while on Facebook, and so the child is consciously shirking responsibility; however, this is entirely non-unique to social networking; the same could be said for hanging out with friends, or online gaming, or playing outside, or whatever recreational activity you choose; ultimately, the blame for not completing the work does not lie with the sites or the other activities; it lies with the child, who gave into temptation as opposed to carrying out his/her responsibility.
b. Many teachers are taking advantage of these sites, and are creating accounts for themselves so that they might hold their students accountable for actions, and also update them on assignments, tests, etc. In fact, one particular open-source networking site, Elgg, allows students and teachers alike to create profiles, blogs, and is entirely intended to enhance the educational experience by giving students a place to go outside of class to contact teachers, keep current on assignments, projects, and quizzes, and to ensure, to the best of their abilities, that they don't shirk responsibility; if anything, the adaptability of networking sites is doing more good for education than anything.
2. Sexual Predators
a. The fact is, these accounts, as my opponent tells us, were deleted; this proves that many of the oversight measures were effective in dealing with threats; further oversight would include concerned friends, and a watchful parent; again, if a child is being sexually harassed, somebody needs to be told for action to be taken; after all, police and ambulances aren't going to show up if you don't call 911 first.
3. Computer and Financial Harm
a. As my opponent points out, many of these sites have trouble with viruses, bugs, glitches, phishing, etc.; however, my opponent also unwittingly points out that these sites have DISCLAIMERS that WARN users about these kinds of dangers; obviously, if a site has taken the time to put out a warning about this kind of danger, users would be far past incompetent not to heed those warnings; any risks taken against the disclaimer are at the user's own risk.
4. Time and Obesity
a. Exactly; every hobby takes time; however, this does not mean that a person has to be on their account "constantly", as my opponent would have you believe; social networking is simply like many other hobbies, nothing more; my opponent doesn't see the fact that, for the person using the site, being able to easily socialize with friends online and plan outings is beneficial to them; plus, as my opponent also unintentionally reveals, any hobby would take away from the possible time needed to exercise or read a book; this is entirely non-unique to networking sites.
b. Obesity, as far as I am aware, isn't directly caused by social networking; it's caused by things like a poor diet, slow metabolism, gross lack of exercise (even people who use Facebook can take 20 minutes from their day every once in a while), and pure genetics; so, the argument about obese Americans, while true, doesn't really correspond to social networking.
5. Harmful information
a. This is not the fault of social networking sites; a lot of information can be taken from a lot of places, just because of the internet's open nature; people have things stolen like their social security number, their credit card number, their bank account information, etc. So, with using the internet, there's always an imperative to keep information safe; plus, on most social networking sites I've seen, users are (generally) smart enough not to post direct addresses on their profiles, somewhat eliminating this risk.
b. Users have to exercise a certain amount of discretion when posting sensitive information online; again, look back a point my opponent previously mentioned; these sites have disclaimers warning against this kind of situation; so, as I've proven, the responsibility to avoid these risks and post only safe information lies solely with the user.
*Addendum*
With few characters left, let me remind everyone that my opponent entirely DROPPED her argument from round 1, so this definitely goes Pro.
Now, I look forward to my opponent's response, I again wish her good luck, and with that, I'm off to lunch. :)
Report this Argument
*raises white flag* I concede, as long as I still get to live. :)
Report this Argument
Pro
Well, you've heard it from my opponent folks, an open concession; needless to say, once you flow through my arguments from Round 2, and add that to her recent forfeiture, it's clear who you need to vote for in today's debate.
Sometimes I really wish that I could take trophies off of people that I've beaten, like the way hunters take the head, or the foot, or the pelt of an animal that they kill. We should get one of those.
http://debatepedia.idebate.org/en/index.php/Debate:Social_networking_sites#Are_social_networking_sites_generally_beneficial_to_our_world.3F
§ Users have a choice. Most websites have a privacy feature with which the user may make items such as their profile, pictures, or blog be made private or available to only their friends.
Besides, users have the choice whether to go on social networking sites or not.
§ Social networking sites give too great of access and control to governments. ACLU. "Facebook Not as Private as You Might Think" Retrieved 11.29.07 - "Thanks to some pre-Internet Supreme Court cases such as Smith v. Maryland, the Fourth Amendment does not apply to information held by a third parties like Facebook. The government does not need to have a court-ordered warrant to obtain your personal information held by Facebook- it just needs to ask for it with a subpoena.
In the future, the information you have stored on Facebook could come back to haunt you. Even if you delete your profile, Facebook holds onto your information for what they decide is a “reasonable” amount of time."
§ Social networking sites create great opportunities for making friends.
§ Social networking sites distract from quality interpersonal connections.The most valuable connections are not made over the Internet but in person-to-person interactions. While social networking can be used to establish person-to-person interactions, it more frequently results in massive amounts of time being spent online interacting at a distance.
§ Social networking sites make it possible to maintain fictional identity.Social networking sites allow people to create a "mask" and claim to be a completely different person from who they really are.
§ Social networking sites create great opportunities for professional networking. Since "it's not what you know, but who you know", this is very important.
§ Social networking sites enable individuals to move toward making face-to-face meetings: Social networking sites are a starting place for face-to-face meetings between professionals.
§ Social networking sites do not allow for trusting professional relationships to be established. Face-to-face conversations and hand-shakes are still the most important element of sound professional networking.
§ Social networking sites are a great place to exchange information.
§ Social networking sites are a major distraction from learning. People are spending far too much time on social networking sites, and away from books, newspapers, and other educational resources. The information contained in social networking sites is generally shallow and trivial as compared to these other valuable sources of learning. Since there is limited time in the day and in life, that a growing proportion of that time is being spent by individuals on social networking sites is a major problem to the general education of the public.
§ Social networking sites have agreements that explicitly say that information can be used commercially in any way. If an individual doesn't want their information to be used commercially, than they shouldn't enter into agreements with these social networking sites. Or, they should close their account.
§ More targeted advertising is of greater value to the consumer. Why should we complain that advertisers will have more information about us to advertise to us things that we are more interested in buying? Advertising is not evil. Ads inform the consumer of a product that they may judge to be of value in their lives and worth spending money on. No product is being forced on consumers by ads, but offered as something that the consumer might deem worthy to purchase. Therefore, it should be welcome that social networking sites offer advertising firms information that can bring products of greater potential value to a particular consumer's attention.
§ It is unethical for social network sites to use personal information to enable advertisers to better target you as a consumer. Personal information should not be used for commercial purposes. It is too invasive, and can cause emotional damage. For example, what if your profile indicates that your boy friend just broke up with you, for example. An ad agency is allowed to obtain this information and use it to send you an advertisement on break-ups. This could do emotional damage.
Yes
§ Social networking sites are a major distraction to students in classrooms with computers or wireless internet. Students that are on social networking sites in schools are distracted from real learning. They may be in a classroom during a lecture and have their laptop out, considered acceptable and useful for note-taking, but are instead browsing friends' profiles on a social networking site. Students can easily get away with this because their screens generally face away from the professor and lecturer. The temptation is apparently too great to resist, and it is unreasonable to expect that teachers can somehow regulate this problem effectively; they can't walk around the room constantly checking what is on students' screens. This problem is so widespread, so unresolvable by other means, and so unfortunate to quality education, that it is reasonable for schools to take the decisive step of blocking student access to these sites through school or classroom computers or over local area wireless networks in the classroom.No
§ Social networking sites can be beneficial in the classroom for the exchange of information.§ Social networking sites can be an interesting environment for class groups to meet.
§ Students should be taught responsible practices, instead of being blocked outright from these sites.
§ Social networking sites help people keep in touch. Social networking sites are a great way to keep in touch with relatives or friends currently residing far aw
Debate: Harmfulness of Facebook
Privacy: Does Facebook infringe upon privacy rights?
§ Facebook news feeds generally makes people feel exposed and invaded:Danah Boyd, social networking scholar and blogger noted in 2006, "privacy is an experience that people have, not a state of data....When people feel exposed or invaded, there's a privacy issue."[1]
§ Many Facebook users don't understand the privacy implications of allowing news feeds (Therefore, News Feed should be an opt-in rather than an opt-out function). While it is true that users can opt-out of News Feed, this assumes that they would understand the implications of not opting out. The implication of not opting out of news feed is quite profound. Users can view every action you take on Facebook. This creates a general window of public observation of an individual's activities that can have a profound effect on the behaviour of that individual. Some cite this environment of constant observation as a panopticon, a “constant view of individuals through parasocietal mechanisms that influence behavior simply because of the possibility of being observed.” This environment of the constant potential for observation and surveillance dramatically effects behavior by making individuals constantly on-guard under the public observation glass. Yet, those that choose not to opt-out of "news feed" are not likely to consider the profound behavioral implications of these actions. Also, Facebook tends to hide the privacy features of people's accounts and sets the settings to a very visible default. An example of the effects of this ishttp://www.youropenbook.org/, which is an independent search engine for Facebook statuses.
§ Social networking sites give too great of access and control to governments. ACLU. "Facebook Not as Private as You Might Think" Retrieved 11.29.07 - "Thanks to some pre-Internet Supreme Court cases such as Smith v. Maryland, the Fourth Amendment does not apply to information held by a third parties like Facebook. The government does not need to have a court-ordered warrant to obtain your personal information held by Facebook- it just needs to ask for it with a subpoena.
§ Not all information is disclosed voluntarily. Given that anyone can submit anything on Facebook, it means that this person can share any information about any individual without permission. This infringes upon the right of every individual to privacy, which is based on sharing personal information selectively and voluntarily.
§ Commercial reasons not to promote tight security. Facebook does not motivate its users to secure their profiles and personal information more, because it has financial incentives to yield as much information from the users as possible. These include targeted adverts, selling personal information, etc.
§ Facebook's news-feed now has an off-switch, giving users the choice to adjust privacy settings. Choice is essential to privacy. If users can adjust privacy settings, than privacy issues largely disappear. It can no longer be argued in this context that Facebook or other social networking sites are violating the privacy of their users. Rather, the issue becomes that users are voluntarily opening themselves up to the world at their own risk.
§ Public information has a moderating effect on individuals. It is good that information about individuals is made more public. Social judgment has a positive moderating effect. Confucius actually said that he was very lucky that all of his actions were publicly scrutinized, as it ensured that he was careful and prudent in making decisions. Similarly, News Feed may make an individual think twice before they join an extremist group on Facebook, as it might risk a negative backlash of judgment from those in their network that view that action on News Feed.
Friendships: Does Facebook harm relationships?
Pro
§ Social networking sites distract from quality interpersonal connections.The most valuable connections are not made over the Internet but in person-to-person interactions. While social networking can be used to establish person-to-person interactions, it more frequently results in massive amounts of time being spent online interacting at a distance.§ Facebook undermines the value of interpersonal relationships. Facebook restricts communication to a couple of words or sentences, instead of promoting real personal contact. People therefore socialize less, and their relationships become more superficial.
§ Facebook causes the harmful spread of gossip. As anything can be said on Facebook and anyone with the correct permissions can comment there is a risk of a gossip spread. This may be seen by the object of the discussion which may cause issues within the relationship. Gossiping can be done publicly or privately on Facebook, so it promotes bitchiness, gossip, bullying and being two-faced.
Con
§ Long-distance friendships. Facebook helps people stay in touch, no matter how far they may be from each other.§ Facebook is a symptom, not a cause. Our society is changing dramatically and Facebook is a mere byproduct of these changes. We live our lives differently, in diverse environments and social networking sites just reflect our altered attitudes.
Pro
§ Social networking sites make it possible to maintain fictional identity.Social networking sites allow people to create a "mask" and claim to be a completely different person from who they really are.§ Facebook suits criminals perfectly. Thanks to "open" privacy setting and the main purpose of Facebook - sharing as much information as possible - this social networking site becomes a safe haven for stalkers, pedophiles, etc.
Con
§ Information is disclosed and shared voluntarily and based on privacy setting. Users are rational people who can protect themselves by adjusting privacy settings and choosing which information they want to share.Information: Does Facebook help spread "undesirable" information? Does it matter?
Pro
§ Social networking sites are a major distraction from learning. People are spending far too much time on social networking sites, and away from books, newspapers, and other educational resources. The information contained in social networking sites is generally shallow and trivial as compared to these other valuable sources of learning. Since there is limited time in the day and in life, that a growing proportion of that time is being spent by individuals on social networking sites is a major problem to the general education of the public.§ Facebook fosters hate speech. Racist, xenophobic, extremist and other "hate speech" groups attract hundreds of members, who are not prosecuted, although hate speech is (in most countries) illegal.
§ Inappropriate content is not restricted by age. Even though Facebook - in theory - tries to prevent young children from having their own profile, in practice are its controls ineffective, as the only "proof" of someone's age is his or her own confirmation. Therefore even young children have access to certain inappropriate content (groups, fan pages, videos, photos), which can be morally damaging.
Con
§ Facebook promotes freedom of speech. Facebook is sometimes the only tool to express someone's opinion in a politically unfree country that restricts basic human rights and freedoms.§ Inappropriate content is being reported and removed.
§ Facebook can be used for educational purposes. Because Facebook makes information- and file-sharing easier, it is an ideal tool for students to share materials or discuss important issues.
Unique harms: Are there any harms unique to Facebook?
Pro
§ Facebook is too interconnected. Facebook not only helps spread information in form of videos, texts, and pictures, but it also reaches wide audience. Any cyberbullying, cyber threats, or hate speech has serious consequences precisely because it can provide much more data to many more people than a single web focusing on sharing videos, for example.Con
§ All possible harms are not unique to Facebook. Privacy issues, cyberbullying, inappropriate content. All of these are innate to not just Facebook, but all social networking sites. Other problems connected with Facebook - such as waste of time - are inherent to a large amount of other websites (games, chat...).Waste of time: Is Facebook just a waste of time?
Pro
§ Facebook does not provide valuable content.§ Facebook exacerbates negative effects of entertainment websites.Facebook offers a lot of distraction, which often results in procrastination in front of a screen. People thus spend more time engaging with computers, which can have negative health implications.
Con
§ Facebook does provide valuable information. Certain fan pages or groups can be edifying, informing about different cultures, religions, traditions...Human factor: Is it Facebook, or its users doing harm?
Pro
§ "A weapon cannot be separated from a murderer." Facebook is a powerful tool to do harm, and although this harm is, in effect, done by people, it is carried out through this website, which enables them to do so.Con
§ "Guns don't kill people; people kill people." It is not Facebook doing harm, it is its users. Had Facebook not existed, people would find other ways to hurt/harm each other.Culture: Does Facebook harm our culture?
Pro
§ Facebook enhances stereotypes. There are many groups and fan pages that enhance our cultural biases, ranging from "Heyy Babe Lets Put Up The England Flags.. LOL Jk, The Muslims Dnt Like It!" fan page to "brunettes are better" groups.Con
§ Facebook undermines stereotypes. Dozens of groups and fan pages are trying to undermine social and cultural biases, such as "Muslims are not terrorists", or "We Christians love Pakistan".Commercial use of info: Is the commercial use of personal information unethical?
Pro
§ It is unethical for social network sites to use personal information to enable advertisers to better target you as a consumer. Personal information should not be used for commercial purposes. It is too invasive, and can cause emotional damage. For example, what if your profile indicates that your boy friend just broke up with you, for example. An ad agency is allowed to obtain this information and use it to send you an advertisement on break-ups. This could do emotional damage.Con
§ Social networking sites have agreements that explicitly say that information can be used commercially in any way. If an individual doesn't want their information to be used commercially, than they shouldn't enter into agreements with these social networking sites. Or, they should close their account.§ More targeted advertising is of greater value to the consumer. Why should we complain that advertisers will have more information about us to advertise to us things that we are more interested in buying? Advertising is not evil. Ads inform the consumer of a product that they may judge to be of value in their lives and worth spending money on. No product is being forced on consumers by ads, but offered as something that the consumer might deem worthy to purchase. Therefore, it should be welcome that social networking sites offer advertising firms information that can bring products of greater potential value to a particular consumer's attention.
http://socialwhisper.wordpress.com/2009/02/26/social-networking-more-harm-than-good/
Social Networking – More harm than good?
Posted by: Author on: February 26, 2009· In: Social media
· Comment!
Over the last couple of days a growing number of articles have been catching my eye which appear to have all originated from a debate in the House of Lords created by neuroscientist Lady Greenfield.
Her comments suggest that social networking sites have a negative impact on our brains, especially in younger people which causes shortened attention spans, encourages instant gratification and make young people more self-centred, resulting with an inability to empathise and a shaky sense of identity.
The Unfiltered Lens > OPINION
The pros & cons of social networking
By Michelle St. OngeStaff Writer
Published: Monday, March 7, 2011
Updated: Monday, March 7, 2011 01:03
Michelle St. Onge / Facebook.com
Currently, there are dozens of free sites that range from reuniting and meeting people, photo and video sharing, blogging, RSS updates, music, hobbies and interests, business, academics, and the list goes on. Nevertheless, what all these booming sites have in common is that they are powerful in connecting various societies of our planet. But what are they all about? I have researched and compiled a list of pros and cons so you, the readers, can make your own decision about whether or not you want to go home and continue using your Facebook, Twitter, MySpace and Livejournal account.
Note: These are not my opinions, nor those of The Unfiltered Lens. This research is based on studies and facts compiled by others.
PRO Social Networking Sites
1. Social networking sites allow people to create new relationships and reconnect with friends and family. Increased communication, even online, strengthens relationships.
2. Social networking sites allow for creative expression in a new medium. They provide free messaging, blogging, photo storage, games, event invitations, and many other services to anyone with access to a computer and the Internet.
3. Social networking sites bring people with common interests together, offer exposure to new ideas from around the world, and lower inhibitions to overcome social anxiety. People who have a difficulty communicating in person are more comfortable interacting via the Internet.
4. 60 million Americans received help with major life issues (changing jobs, finding a new place to live, buying a car, and caring for someone with an illness) from people in their social networks in 2006. These people said social networking sites helped them connect with friends and experts who assisted in their decisions.
5. 59% of students with access to the Internet report that they use social networking sites to discuss educational topics including career and college planning, and 50% use the sites to talk about school assignments. Some parents and teachers say that using these sites helps students improve their reading, writing, and conflict resolution skills, learn to express themselves more clearly, and meet new and different kinds of students from around the world.
6. Social media helps low-income kids become more familiar with computers and related technology. One study showed that nearly three quarters of children from poor households have profiles on MySpace or Facebook. By using these websites, they have learned how to edit and upload photos and videos, and have become experienced in using html code to personalize their profile pages.
7. Studies have shown that being part of a social network has a positive impact, including increased quality of life and a reduction in the risk of health problems. They help improve stroke recovery, memory retention, and overall well-being.
8. Internet users have larger social networks than non-users, and using social networking sites to maintain those relationships facilitates more face-to-face interaction. Internet users are augmenting their offline social networks, not replacing them.
9. Social media can be a powerful tool for social change and an alternative to more traditional methods of communication. During the protests of the Iranian election in June 2009, protestors used Twitter to circumvent government control over phones and the media. Twitter was so important that the US State Department asked Twitter to delay a network upgrade that would have taken the website offline at a busy time of day in Iran. Twitter complied and rescheduled the downtime to 1:30 am Tehran time. The ability to remain anonymous helped protect people who were spreading information in real time.
10. To make social networking sites safer for children, the sites have minimum age requirements and default settings based on the user's age to protect children. MySpace, for example, requires users to be at least 14 years old, and the profiles of all users under the age of 16 are automatically set to "private" so they cannot be found during a general search.
11. Social media sites are expanding from general interest to more specific uses that benefit society. For example, sites have been created for medical purposes such as dealing with life altering diseases, alcoholism, drug addiction, weight loss, and autism. Social networking sites with a specific focus help introduce people to others who are dealing with similar issues and provide information, contacts, peer support, and encouragement.
CON Social Networking Sites
1. Social networking sites entice people to spend more time online and less time interacting face-to-face. The sites offer many time wasting activities that supplant more productive activities. Teens spend an average of nine hours per week on social networking sites.
2. Teens growing up with these sites may not be aware that the information they post is public and that photos and text can be retrieved even after deletion. Consequences from over-sharing personal information include vulnerability to sexual or financial predators and lost job opportunities from employers finding embarrassing photos or comments.
3. Social networking sites have no way to verify that people are who they claim to be, leaving people vulnerable to solicitations from online predators who are able to mask their true identities. In Feb. 2009, MySpace identified 90,000 registered sex offenders with profiles on the site, while Facebook declined to reveal how many were present on its site. Even if the sites agree to remove sex offenders, they cannot identify all of them or stop them from creating new accounts.
4. Social networking sites make cyber-bullying, a type of bullying that occurs online, easier and more public than bullying through other online activities such as e-mail and instant messaging. A 2009 study found that 17.3% of middle school students have been victims of cyber-bullying. Victims often experience a drop in grades, decreased self-esteem, and other symptoms of depression.
5. The US Marine Corps banned the use of all social media sites on its networks because the sites are "a proven haven for malicious actors and content and are particularly high risk due to information exposure, user generated content and targeting by adversaries." The entire Department of Defense is considering a ban on social networking sites because of concerns over security threats and potential computer viruses.
6. The use of social networking sites can cause personality and brain disorders in children, such as the inability to have real conversations, limited attention spans, a need for instant gratification, Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), and self-centered personalities. The fast pace of the sites may rewire the brain with repeated exposure because parts of the brain used for traditional, offline activities become under used.
7. The hours per day of face-to-face socializing have declined as the use of social media has increased. People who use these sites frequently are prone to social isolation. Parents spend less time with their children and couples spend less time together even when they live in the same house, because they are using the Internet instead of interacting with each other.
8. A 2007 study found that workers using Facebook in the office were costing Australian businesses up to $4.5 billion (US) per year. A Feb. 2009 report stated that social networking sites were costing UK businesses an estimated $12.5 billion (US) annually. Numbers for lost revenue from lower worker productivity when employees use social networking sites in the US are not available, but one study found that two-thirds of US workers with Facebook accounts access that site during work hours.
9. A false sense of security may leave social networking site users vulnerable to security attacks such as hacking, leaking sensitive information, and sending viruses. People trust messages sent through social networking sites and consider them more legitimate than e-mails. However, social networks do not scan messages for viruses or phishing scams, while most e-mail accounts do scan the messages for spam and viruses through antivirus software.
10. The public nature of online profiles creates security risks about which most users are unaware. Cyber-criminals can gather information to be used for identity theft from social networking profiles, such as birthdays, pet names, mothers' maiden names, names of children, and other details often used in passwords and security questions. Offline crime may result from posting personal information, like home robberies committed after a person announces vacation plans and alerts criminals when the home will be left unattended.
11. Social networking sites were created to make money, not to improve peoples' lives. These websites use networks of online friends to accumulate data about people for the purpose of selling advertising. The sites place cookies on the users' computers, gather information, and track interests to show personalized ads. These advertising practices may constitute an invasion of privacy.
*information provided by socialnetworking.procon.org